4 ms·

"But Moorcock, one of the most prolific living fantasists, sees Tolkien’s creation as little more than a conservative vision of the status quo, an adventure tha

"But Moorcock, one of the most prolific living fantasists, sees Tolkien’s creation as little more than a conservative vision of the status quo, an adventure that brings its hero “There and Back Again,” rather than into a world where experience means you can’t go home again...”" Can someone explain this to me? Well Bilbo does go home, he knows it is temporary and home - to/for him - is not what it once was, and Frodo's story line out-and-out states that he is going thru a change where he cannot go back. If this is truly what Moorcock thinks, I don't see it.

tragic 12y ago
Moorcock's Tolkien take-down is here: http://www.revolutionsf.com/article.php?id=953 http://www.revolutionsf.com/article.php?id=953 It's a good read, although I'm partial to some big dumb sword-waving pulp fantasy anyway.
- mipapage 12y ago
  Ah yes, this was mentioned in the article. I was going to google it but didn't. Thanks, another 'tab for the weekend'!
rosser 12y ago
I think he's talking about something very similar to China Miéville's critique of fantasy (and, frankly, some SF) literature: that so much of the genre is ultimately this politically reactionary, "Oh, if only we could restore the rightful king (or his heir — and notice how it's always a male), everything would be swell again!" sort of thing. The "home" Moorcock is decrying Tolkien's return to is the golden age that never really existed in the first place — except in fiction, where you can paint a rosy picture of the past and proclaim it true by author's fiat.
- mipapage 12y ago
  Interesting, thanks I hadn't thought about it from that higher level.
- wpietri 12y ago
  Yes. If you look at protofascist movements, very often there's a hearkening back to a mythical golden age. As an adult, I now am also not so comfortable with Tolkein's strong emphasis on race and tribe. Or how it's the intrinsically evil dark or unnatural peoples from the south versus the fading pure white peoples from the north. Fun stories, and I'll happily read them, but I think it's instructive about some human inclinations that, if indulged, take us to ugly places.
  - PhasmaFelis 12y ago
    Tolkien's work can be naive and problematic on matters of race, but it's a mistake to think that he himself was racist. He was furiously opposed to the Nazis well before it was fashionable to be so, and the same with apartheid. Describing LotR as good white northern people vs. evil black southern people is extremely inaccurate, I think. Some of Sauron's minions were dark men from the South, but see Sam's reaction when he finds one of them dead: "He wondered what the man's name was and where he came from; and if he was really evil at heart, or what lies or threats had led him on the long march from his home; and if he would not really rather have stayed there in peace." The unshakably evil nature of the orcs is certainly problematic, and it's fair to say that Tolkien wasn't conscious of the implications there; but it's also fair to say that orcs are created things without free will, and Tolkien thought of them more like self-replicating war machines than like people of any earthly race. Humans (and elves and dwarves and hobbits) of whatever color are invariably shown as being moral beings with the capacity for both good and evil.
    - wpietri 12y ago
      I'd happily believe that he wasn't consciously racist. But I'd find it hard to believe he had no racial bias; even today things like Project Implicit show most people as biased, and he grew up in a very different era. But still, I think the way he exaggerates various human race and class characteristics into Essentially Different Peoples and then puts together a giant race war is problematic as anything other than light entertainment. Great battles of Good vs Evil are fine for kids' stories and escapist fantasy, but I think Moorcock and others are spot on that it's troubling to the extent that people take it more seriously.
- wtbob 12y ago
  Part of Tolkien's worldview was that the past really was a golden age in certain aspects. Yeah, it really is reactionary—but horrible events demand a reaction.
fennecfoxen 12y ago
In the book edition, moreover, Frodo can't go home again because (in an allegory of the English experience after WWII) the global conflict has brought a good dose of the ugly stuff back there, too. Much unlike the film, which has been "updated".

tragic 12y ago

Moorcock's Tolkien take-down is here: http://www.revolutionsf.com/article.php?id=953 http://www.revolutionsf.com/article.php?id=953 It's a good read, although I'm partial to some big dumb sword-waving pulp fantasy anyway.

mipapage 12y ago
Ah yes, this was mentioned in the article. I was going to google it but didn't. Thanks, another 'tab for the weekend'!

rosser 12y ago

I think he's talking about something very similar to China Miéville's critique of fantasy (and, frankly, some SF) literature: that so much of the genre is ultimately this politically reactionary, "Oh, if only we could restore the rightful king (or his heir — and notice how it's always a male), everything would be swell again!" sort of thing. The "home" Moorcock is decrying Tolkien's return to is the golden age that never really existed in the first place — except in fiction, where you can paint a rosy picture of the past and proclaim it true by author's fiat.

mipapage 12y ago
Interesting, thanks I hadn't thought about it from that higher level.
wpietri 12y ago
Yes. If you look at protofascist movements, very often there's a hearkening back to a mythical golden age. As an adult, I now am also not so comfortable with Tolkein's strong emphasis on race and tribe. Or how it's the intrinsically evil dark or unnatural peoples from the south versus the fading pure white peoples from the north. Fun stories, and I'll happily read them, but I think it's instructive about some human inclinations that, if indulged, take us to ugly places.
- PhasmaFelis 12y ago
  Tolkien's work can be naive and problematic on matters of race, but it's a mistake to think that he himself was racist. He was furiously opposed to the Nazis well before it was fashionable to be so, and the same with apartheid. Describing LotR as good white northern people vs. evil black southern people is extremely inaccurate, I think. Some of Sauron's minions were dark men from the South, but see Sam's reaction when he finds one of them dead: "He wondered what the man's name was and where he came from; and if he was really evil at heart, or what lies or threats had led him on the long march from his home; and if he would not really rather have stayed there in peace." The unshakably evil nature of the orcs is certainly problematic, and it's fair to say that Tolkien wasn't conscious of the implications there; but it's also fair to say that orcs are created things without free will, and Tolkien thought of them more like self-replicating war machines than like people of any earthly race. Humans (and elves and dwarves and hobbits) of whatever color are invariably shown as being moral beings with the capacity for both good and evil.
  - wpietri 12y ago
    I'd happily believe that he wasn't consciously racist. But I'd find it hard to believe he had no racial bias; even today things like Project Implicit show most people as biased, and he grew up in a very different era. But still, I think the way he exaggerates various human race and class characteristics into Essentially Different Peoples and then puts together a giant race war is problematic as anything other than light entertainment. Great battles of Good vs Evil are fine for kids' stories and escapist fantasy, but I think Moorcock and others are spot on that it's troubling to the extent that people take it more seriously.
wtbob 12y ago
Part of Tolkien's worldview was that the past really was a golden age in certain aspects. Yeah, it really is reactionary—but horrible events demand a reaction.

fennecfoxen 12y ago

In the book edition, moreover, Frodo can't go home again because (in an allegory of the English experience after WWII) the global conflict has brought a good dose of the ugly stuff back there, too. Much unlike the film, which has been "updated".